Hi there,
So I am giving the Evolutionists a break... I am on medication so I go for a little more than a week with almost no motivation to do anything, let alone argue with Evolutionists. The thing is it still boils over in my mind, even spewing out from time to time, like this and I don't think there's a better place for it than among friends who disagree with Evolution also. The crux of what I have been thinking is that there is something wrong with removing telos. The principle the Holy Spirit gave me was this:
If you remove the point from progress, the past and the future remain mutually antagonistic.
Now there are a few reasons for this, depending on the context you take and a few arguments you can make, depending on how much you are prepared to accept as relevant. The point is, it is a function of time, to take the point given by progress and transfer it to the future. If progress comes to time without a point, there is no transfer to the future. Like anything, if you don't have the key to the door, if you don't have the code to the computer, if you don't have the password for the inner circle, if you don't pay the price for the newspaper, whatever, you will not get through. You can say "but I'm going through the motions" all you like, the door won't open, the computer won't turn on, the inner circle won't let you in and you won't get the newspaper. It's just so [bless and do not curse] obvious.
When it comes to living organisms this is like saying that if you remove the messenger RNA from the DNA, you collapse the organism. "But wait a minute" you say "Evolutionists aren't saying there is no RNA" well, aren't they? RNA is what gives DNA a point, it's what shapes it one way or another, towards another life stage in the life stages of the creature or away - is it time to mature or not? is it time to grow or not? - there's no spontaneous decision about this stuff, the RNA gradually works its way through the body and shapes it all depending on what the nervous system is telling the rest of the body what the point is. I mean these are real questions that real people ask themselves continually, you honestly mean to tell me that an Evolutionist can pronounce that there is no point over all of that?
So you see, it's a bigger claim than you think, saying there is no point, a much bigger claim and I think it is on the way to proving what is fundamentally wrong with Evolution. I don't want to proceed to quickly however, because simply saying Evolution is wrong is not going to achieve anything. There is plenty of practical A transitions to B science that goes on in the name of Evolution and it would be a shape to waste it because of an ideological stoush. The point is there is a point and because of that point, the past and future do not fight and that accords with the reality that we all experience. The only problem is, and call me stupid if you must, I really don't know how to progress beyond just accepting this as fact.
I mean, I determine a point for myself, and it guides my thoughts and actions, I even shape other people's futures against it, as far as my influence with them goes (give or take the absolute necessity of that obviously) and I am frequently prepared to shift or change around that point to accomodate others. Why not? But then you have Evolutionists and its not that they don't like to be argued with, if you can be imaginative, but they simply don't budge on this point. They don't want a point, a point makes them think and thinking is dangerous to the blind acceptance they say is "what makes sense, always and only". I mean how do you substitute out a bad carrot when the donkey has already tasted it while it's good?
I think the answer is that you have to give them more of the bad carrot - classic reverse psychology with a twist - because once you give them enough of the nonsense that results, they will have to regurgitate and regurgitating will mean they spew up the theory that is sickening them. It's dicey, though. For one thing, they are very sure of what they thought was good carrot, for another thing, they don't ever actually taste the bad carrot, it's just perpetually in the future where it looks slightly better than going back to the time when everyone worshipped Jesus, I mean that is what they think right? And the world would certainly pay lip service to Jesus if He was the only thing going, we all know that, right? So I guess what I'm asking you is, where do you go from here?
How do you tell the way in which someone has believed Evolution (and believing is unique to everyone right?) enough to tell them plainly why their head is fighting with itself over past and future? I mean we are talking about ticking time bombs here, right? They are fighting and the reason is very plainly that they don't think there's a point and their number one theory isn't giving it to them anyway. I mean it's torture. How do you show compassion to these people? Only by having a "point" yourself. But where does that leave you? "Congratulations, you are now our guinea pig, you think there is a point and you are the only one among us who does". Not a pretty picture right? Not a smart one anyway?
I guess the thing is that it's pretty hard to have a point, by half-measures. You can't just say "Ok you don't like points, here have Half-A-PointTM" I mean, what does that get you? I don't know though, the Lord is kinda telling me that is the right direction after all. The point is to "perfect your Evolutionary bias" you could say, I guess. "Evolutionary bias" would be your idea that your species counts and that you want to advance it as much as possible. Do you reckon they'll buy it? It sounds more like an optional extra than something you would seriously incorporate into your everyday thinking. But then, I guess that is the price you pay for believing in Evolution, no real drive to succeed, just survive. Ok, so that's something.
Any thoughts?
So I am giving the Evolutionists a break... I am on medication so I go for a little more than a week with almost no motivation to do anything, let alone argue with Evolutionists. The thing is it still boils over in my mind, even spewing out from time to time, like this and I don't think there's a better place for it than among friends who disagree with Evolution also. The crux of what I have been thinking is that there is something wrong with removing telos. The principle the Holy Spirit gave me was this:
If you remove the point from progress, the past and the future remain mutually antagonistic.
Now there are a few reasons for this, depending on the context you take and a few arguments you can make, depending on how much you are prepared to accept as relevant. The point is, it is a function of time, to take the point given by progress and transfer it to the future. If progress comes to time without a point, there is no transfer to the future. Like anything, if you don't have the key to the door, if you don't have the code to the computer, if you don't have the password for the inner circle, if you don't pay the price for the newspaper, whatever, you will not get through. You can say "but I'm going through the motions" all you like, the door won't open, the computer won't turn on, the inner circle won't let you in and you won't get the newspaper. It's just so [bless and do not curse] obvious.
When it comes to living organisms this is like saying that if you remove the messenger RNA from the DNA, you collapse the organism. "But wait a minute" you say "Evolutionists aren't saying there is no RNA" well, aren't they? RNA is what gives DNA a point, it's what shapes it one way or another, towards another life stage in the life stages of the creature or away - is it time to mature or not? is it time to grow or not? - there's no spontaneous decision about this stuff, the RNA gradually works its way through the body and shapes it all depending on what the nervous system is telling the rest of the body what the point is. I mean these are real questions that real people ask themselves continually, you honestly mean to tell me that an Evolutionist can pronounce that there is no point over all of that?
So you see, it's a bigger claim than you think, saying there is no point, a much bigger claim and I think it is on the way to proving what is fundamentally wrong with Evolution. I don't want to proceed to quickly however, because simply saying Evolution is wrong is not going to achieve anything. There is plenty of practical A transitions to B science that goes on in the name of Evolution and it would be a shape to waste it because of an ideological stoush. The point is there is a point and because of that point, the past and future do not fight and that accords with the reality that we all experience. The only problem is, and call me stupid if you must, I really don't know how to progress beyond just accepting this as fact.
I mean, I determine a point for myself, and it guides my thoughts and actions, I even shape other people's futures against it, as far as my influence with them goes (give or take the absolute necessity of that obviously) and I am frequently prepared to shift or change around that point to accomodate others. Why not? But then you have Evolutionists and its not that they don't like to be argued with, if you can be imaginative, but they simply don't budge on this point. They don't want a point, a point makes them think and thinking is dangerous to the blind acceptance they say is "what makes sense, always and only". I mean how do you substitute out a bad carrot when the donkey has already tasted it while it's good?
I think the answer is that you have to give them more of the bad carrot - classic reverse psychology with a twist - because once you give them enough of the nonsense that results, they will have to regurgitate and regurgitating will mean they spew up the theory that is sickening them. It's dicey, though. For one thing, they are very sure of what they thought was good carrot, for another thing, they don't ever actually taste the bad carrot, it's just perpetually in the future where it looks slightly better than going back to the time when everyone worshipped Jesus, I mean that is what they think right? And the world would certainly pay lip service to Jesus if He was the only thing going, we all know that, right? So I guess what I'm asking you is, where do you go from here?
How do you tell the way in which someone has believed Evolution (and believing is unique to everyone right?) enough to tell them plainly why their head is fighting with itself over past and future? I mean we are talking about ticking time bombs here, right? They are fighting and the reason is very plainly that they don't think there's a point and their number one theory isn't giving it to them anyway. I mean it's torture. How do you show compassion to these people? Only by having a "point" yourself. But where does that leave you? "Congratulations, you are now our guinea pig, you think there is a point and you are the only one among us who does". Not a pretty picture right? Not a smart one anyway?
I guess the thing is that it's pretty hard to have a point, by half-measures. You can't just say "Ok you don't like points, here have Half-A-PointTM" I mean, what does that get you? I don't know though, the Lord is kinda telling me that is the right direction after all. The point is to "perfect your Evolutionary bias" you could say, I guess. "Evolutionary bias" would be your idea that your species counts and that you want to advance it as much as possible. Do you reckon they'll buy it? It sounds more like an optional extra than something you would seriously incorporate into your everyday thinking. But then, I guess that is the price you pay for believing in Evolution, no real drive to succeed, just survive. Ok, so that's something.
Any thoughts?
