To the editor:
John Chisham’s response to Dr. Gehle’s recent letter confirms his true intentions at the “celebration event” of the origin of species. It is evident that this is a one-sided debate that was not organized by both parties that appear to be represented.
If John truly wanted an open and useful debate, then his group would have asked scientists prior to the announcement of the event if they would be willing to join and co-organize such a discussion.
I’m sure John will state that “scientists” will be present, but evolution is a biological topic and being a scientist does not make one an expert in biology; and many professionals that have biological training rarely have any in topics of evolution.
If John wanted a true debate, then his group would have looked for a biologist in the area, such as Dr. Gehle, that is well known for his views on evolution.
Instead, I would expect John will bring some professionals that match his own views, which makes me wonder how many of the numerous religious leaders he will bring that support evolution and believe that this intelligent design nonsense is an affront to both Christianity and evolution.
Keep in mind that the theory of evolution never once states that God does not exist as many creationists would have you believe. Science sets out to explain the natural world, and in those parameters, there is no scientific way to prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural God. Explaining things without God does not necessarily make God unnecessary. If we had a God-o-meter, we would use it!
As for the text, simply go to a bookstore or online and compare Ray Comfort’s 150th anniversary edition with the legitimate version. Ray Comfort’s is abridged, or code for selectively edited.
When reading the 50 page introduction by Ray Comfort, you can see more of the logical fallacies used by his followers.
There are comments that Hitler bases his views on evolution and that Darwin showed disdain towards women. I’m not exactly sure how these argue the data supporting evolution, but if that is the direction they want to take, then maybe we can discuss the numerous passages of Mein Kampf in which Hitler believes he is acting in accordance with God’s will. Should we also discuss the racism and oppression by the church throughout history as well?
Keep in mind that scientific merit is based on data and evidence, unlike pseudoscience which bases its merit on personal credibility.
If anyone is interested in logical fallacies, please attend this event and look for the following: appeal to authority; quote mining; argumentum ad hominem; argumentum ad ignorantiam; strawman; argumentum ex silentio; fallacy of false alternatives; ignoratio elenchi; naturalistic fallacy.
As for me, I’m still trying to figure out why the enzyme that pulls nitrogen out the atmosphere and fixes it into a useful form for life is designed so that it does not work in the presence of oxygen.
Tony J. Greenfield
Marshall
My response?
I invited every science professor at SMSU regardless of background to participate in this open forum. What are they afraid of? Instead of proving their theory in public scientifically, they prefer to write opinion letters attacking me personally. They must think that they cannot deceive the thoughtful public the way they have deceived the students they have taught for all these years. I hope and pray that they will attend and actually participate in a thoughtful, even handed open forum that we have prepared. But of course, it is easier to attack me personally and teach from an ivory tower with no disagreement or debate from young people who have already been indoctrinated.
My friend, Dr. John Frerich, wrote this response:
To the Editor,
I have read with interest the concerns expressed by Professor Vaughn Gehle on the upcoming “celebration” of the publishing of Darwin’s “On the Origin of the Species.” The professor takes great pains to direct readers to “The Clergy Letter Project.” I read it and have actually conversed several times over the years with the originator of this letter and effort to lead churches throughout the country to proclaim an annual “Evolution Sunday.” Professor Zimmerman would likely recognize my name and recall our conversations.
The Clergy Letter Project is a public relations effort to get churches, originally in Wisconsin, and later throughout the country, to “get on board” with the notion that science and religion are not in conflict, but more specifically to teach evolution as scientific fact. As a scientist myself, I find no conflict between the Christian faith and science. In fact, many scientific principles can be found in the Bible long before they were “discovered” by man through science. In the same way the 27 books of the New Testament were “canonized” by the actual eyewitnesses to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ long before the Catholic Church declared them to be “canon,” principles such as the earth being a sphere in shape and the importance of hand washing were established long before science could explain these things.
The central problem for the Christian is God’s Word. 2 Timothy 3:16 declares, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Other references make clear this book is not a book of suggestions, or good ideas, but the “living Word of God.” In Hebrews 4:12, it declares, “For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”
The Clergy Letter Project states, “While virtually all Christians take the Bible seriously and hold it to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice, the overwhelming majority do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook.” Throughout His entire ministry, Jesus Christ repeatedly referred to the Word of God, the “Old Testament,” not as allegory but as fact: “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage of the burning bush;” “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this commandment (on divorce). But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh;” and so on. He used it as literal truth.
There is within the body of professing Christianity a movement away from the authority and sovereignty of the Word of God. Within the Emerging Church, which insists we must “reinvent Christianity,” doubt has been elevated to a most-admired status. But we see in God’s Word these cunning words of the one most opposed to God Himself: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, ‘Indeed, did God say, “You shall not eat from any tree of the garden?”’”
You see, Satan is the original source of doubt and temptation. This is the source of the various compromises within professing Christianity today such as the growing acceptance of homosexuality within some quarters as a biblical practice, creating a furor within many denominations. “Did God say?” is the key question. Can God be trusted in all things, in all He does, in all He says?
The Clergy Letter Project is a public relations effort to turn the hearts of believers from the truth and veracity of God’s Word and replace it with “human knowledge, fully harmonious with religious faith.” Jesus likely had this in mind when He said, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far away from Me. But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.”
The Bible-believing Christian is left with this huge problem: In Romans we read, “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned…Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come, “ and “For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.”
The problem? God says that there was no death in His creation until the sin of Adam in the Garden. No microbes dying, no “transitional forms” dying, no death. Man, in his defiance of God, postulates there must have been “billions of years” of evolution from tiny, unicelled organisms to the complex humans of today. Only one can be right in this matter and it is not a matter of setting reason and logic aside. As for me, I will stick with the One who gave His life and took it back up again after suffering the wrath of His Father in my place, so that I might have the “right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name.” He has a far better record of truth and behavior than men. He said. I believe.
Dr. John Frerich
To date, in this debate, the number of letters published by scientists attacking me personally and this event: 3 letters published responding to this: 1.
Recent Comments