Thursday, 2 February 2012

Where The Tax Pounds Go

Where The Tax Pounds Go

It was disappointing to watch the glee with which Richard Dawkins greeted the announcement of by Michal Gove who stated he will not fund any school with tax money that teaches anything about creation in a science lesson.  (Guardian Jan 2012)
Disappointing too was the level of comment by most guardian readers to the article; the content  was somewhat juvenile and ill informed, for example, “I don’t want my tax pounds to go towards teaching that rubbish!” 
I, too, am a tax payer, and 53% of UK citizens think creation should be taught in school.  Setting aside the rights and wrongs of the subject, there did seem to be the sound of the jackboot, which in fairness, some guardian readers did say that they could also hear.
I think I could also hear the Taliban style fervour coming from the atheistic religious lobby. Having been in discussion with some of these people not too long ago, on a news programme talking about evolution and creation, one kind man emailed me and said, “I should not worry, we are not anti God just anti creationism in Science.”  You sir, were very kind, but in general that has not been my experience.  In fact quite the opposite; not only would this lobby like to remove creation from being taught anywhere in any shape or form, but please, (although they almost never say please) you shall not mention God at all anywhere.  We have seen this kind of thing before, in Albania, in Romania, in Russia and for decades in North Korea, and what accepting and balanced societies that attitude produces. 
At least Richard Dawkins was honest when questioned about the morals of Hitler he replied "What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question. But whatever [defines morality], it’s not the Bible. If it was, we’d be stoning people for breaking the Sabbath."[1]

It’s the arrogance that I find so difficult to swallow: either you agree with me or you should be silent. And yes, I have been at the receiving end of such statements; I have been told by certain people that if they had the power they would do all they could to silence me.  What are they so afraid of?  Richard Dawkins seems to spend more time attacking a God in whom he does not believe than anything else. 
A world view is bound to colour our expectations and the way we look at things, mine has been coloured and I freely confess to that.  The problem is that the atheistic lobby admits no such colour; they are speaking truth, as they see it.  They have been everywhere, understand all things and clearly there is no God.  Should those who have met the God who is there, say anything that opposes this view they are ridiculed mercilessly, and told how stupid they are.
I recently listened to a radio four science programme in which two eminent scientists discussed a recent science exhibition.  Towards the end of the programme the interviewer said in a friendly manner, “It’s quite interesting isn’t it that one of you is a Christian and one of you is an Atheist yet you are both equally qualified and in the same discipline.”  He asked the Christian what he thought about that, the Christian replied, (and I paraphrase) “Well I am a follower of Jesus and that of course affects my world view.” He asked the same question to the Atheists who responded, “no person who says there is a God or calls themselves a Christian can be a genuine scientist.”
I wonder about these people, they are so sure there is no God and yet are afraid when we so-called idiots believe that God is there, and very involved in His world. Why do they get so hot under the collar when we believe God is behind the whole idea of Earth and human history.  If it is all so terribly stupid why are there draconian attempts to regulate and silence us? Are we that fearsome?
I am finally reminded of the song writer in Psalms 14:1 and 53:1 Amp Ver.  “The empty-headed fool has said in his heart, there is no God.” 

Adrian’s Blog
Edited by Technicolour Text
W. 719


  1. Amanda Lannon
    Love this....and I am seething...Richard Dawkins!!! aaargh.

  2. Donald Baldwin
    We need to pray for the guy, that God gives him no rest! then he will either fade away or turn to God?

  3. Helen Currie
    He probably needed more cuddles as a child. Will be hugging my child more to assure he doesn't end up a bitter old prune such as RD!

  4. Keith Lannon
    I blame his father who didn't put enough sugar on his Corn Flakes.

  5. Stuart Lindsell
    Adrian. I agree with most of what you say. However I think when we use short hand words like 'creation' we need to explain what we mean or we just create more confusion. Personally I don't think any form of religious belief should figure in a science lesson. Plenty of room for that in religious studies lessons.Science is science. A christian or Islamic view of origins is not science but religious faith. Yes, of course it is faith based on evidence but not evidence that can be subject to scientific scrutiny.

  6. The trouble is the confusion is already there. If I say fine, we will take an evolutionary line, the next step is to say but behind that is a creator God. Then what happens is that we are told, no you can't say that its not provable. However I am told, what is truth is that the world was created out of nothing, by nothing, and there is no Plan. Please teach that, as that is the truth! The bottom line is you must not in any way shape or form imply anywhere that there might be a God involved. Even if you like in Religious studies, the thought of which appals me as I don't much like religion. So then where do I share my knowledge of the God who is there.

  7. Amanda Lannon
    Why consider watered down adaptation to suit the people who don't like religion, christianity or to even think about God..

  8. Stuart Lindsell
    I think we Christians have to acknowledge that we have played a part in the confusion. After all we do not all agree on this one. For example I am what some might call an evolutionary Theist. That means I see no conflict between science and Christian faith. In their own spheres they are both pursuing truth (at least the majority are).The question of origins i.e who or what is behind it all is a theological or philosophical question not a scientific one. Surely Adrian when they say 'that is not provable' they are right. Is is a faith question about purpose and meaning. The evidence is there to consider but not accessible by science. To quote the bible 'by wisdom man did not come to know God'

  9. Amanda Lannon
    How do you explain the scientists who have found God through trying to disprove Him? I believe science has its place but not as an alternative answer to creation...there is no alternative, God created as is stated in Genesis.

  10. Stuart Lindsell
    Amanda. Trying to disprove God is just as impossible as trying to prove him. Answers depend on what question is being asked.Who created the world? Answer is clear- God. How did God create the world is the question for science not faith.

  11. Amanda Lannon
    Stuart...why do scientists waste so much time trying to find out how God created the world when we all know he spoke it into being, full stop! What more is there to know?

  12. Stuart Lindsell
    It was Christians who were the pioneers of science in our nation not Atheists and they believed by exploring the natural world they would discover more of the wonder and majesty of who God is. They were not time wasters but made a huge contribution to science as we know it today. By the way I don't think of creation as past tense. God is the creator who is still creating. He has not finished yet.

  13. Amanda Lannon
    Thank you Stuart...I do not think that scientists per se are time wasters, but their obsession to prove no God is futile and therefore wasteful. I agree with you that God continues to create. :)

  14. Adrian Hawkes
    The problem to me is not so much the how but that we have a creator God. Or as Francis Schaffer often put it ‘ The God who is there’ the difficulty is when these things enter the quasi legal realm and people like me are told to stop: stop saying that there is such a thing as creation, ‘ we are not created we are an accident of an impersonal non intelligent accidental design’ . Then this becomes a fact, beyond the how of creation, but now the’ who’ of creation. So you must not talk of anything in the universe as being intelligent, having purpose, going somewhere, and plan. And definitely do not suggest that there is a God involved. You must not mention it in Science lessons, oh and to be politically correct do not mention God any where in an educational establishment. Where does that take us? Oh and then let’s take it further you talked about God healing the sick, now legally you must not say such a thing. So my problem is the feeling of being squeezed into someone else’s political correct form which is most unhelpful, and of course legal opponents to the fact that ‘God is there’ have always been so. Acts 5:28 & 29

  15. Amanda Lannon
    Outrageous....slap me in prison if you must, shoot me (and I don't say that because I am sitting in my safe little house in a "safe" little country, I really do mean it)..there is no way I am shutting my mouth on what I believe is the truth...that truth being from the Bible....let none of us be bullied, manipulated or emotionally blackmailed by anyone on creation or anything else in the bible. I am sorry for the squeezing that you are experiencing...don't let a ml. of truth be wrung out of you only to be diluted in their cups of wishy washy water so they can drink a toast to themselves.

  16. - quote here from wikipedia: Theodosius Dobzhansky, a key contributor to the modern evolutionary synthesis, articulated the unifying power of evolutionary theory in a famous paper entitled: "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution".[3]
    If evolution is not a theory, as we now the word theory to mean, but rather a scientific theory that holds all other theories together then how can we believe in God the Creator?
    Surely, by definition, creation is a science. Surely in creating the world and everything in it, God created science?
    I, for one, will not accept that Creation is not a science as I do not accept that science in itself is absolute or gives absolute answers.
    Once a person has faith they do not take God on as a religion but as a fact of life therefore, surely, the law has no right in telling us that we can believe in God as a fact of our lives but not in his creation as a fact. Please! Laws like these take us one more step away from what is meant to be a free society.


  18. Gena Areola
    The thing I don't understand, and is probably quite key to the whole debate, is why secularism is not classed as a religion, after all it is a chosen belief, the same as any other religion, although is my opinion it takes a lot more faith to choose to believe in nothing than to believe in something